Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

cthulu2016

(10,960 posts)
8. The two scales do make it confusing
Mon Jan 16, 2012, 12:26 PM
Jan 2012

I think that what is being represented is that about 2% of our spending goes to isolated cost of Chinese goods and about 13% of our spending to the isolated cost of imported goods. (Not counting the value-added costs of shipping the imports from a port to a Walmart, etc.)

If your question is what part of the remaining (domestic) 87% is goods, versus services, that's a good question.

I would like to see the separation on goods vs. services Broderick Jan 2012 #1
You are looking at it. cthulu2016 Jan 2012 #2
I am not following the chart at all. Confusing to me Broderick Jan 2012 #4
The two scales do make it confusing cthulu2016 Jan 2012 #8
I assume the graph was done that way to better show the rise in the line for Chinese goods. DCBob Jan 2012 #11
That is fascinating.. DCBob Jan 2012 #3
Does this include food? Mz Pip Jan 2012 #5
This is an important point, as is understanding who holds our debt cthulu2016 Jan 2012 #6
Services includes a lot of things that are fixed expenses, housing, insurance, vehicle maintenance.. Fumesucker Jan 2012 #7
Food has to be a large part of the "made in USA" buying. canoeist52 Jan 2012 #9
When food and energy are excluded, 88% of expenditure is 'Made in USA' muriel_volestrangler Jan 2012 #12
I assume outsourcing IT, call center, data processing is a service. DCBob Jan 2012 #10
Services, sure. GOODS? No fucking way. HopeHoops Jan 2012 #13
Even DU heroes like Krugman are pissing in the wind against "common sense" dmallind Jan 2012 #14
+1 cthulu2016 Jan 2012 #15
Nice post. Actual facts usually do little to change a belief that "remains an immutable and pampango Jan 2012 #18
+1! Zalatix Jan 2012 #20
It's an interesting claim about aggregate consumer spending. Igel Jan 2012 #16
What's left is food cthulu2016 Jan 2012 #17
The word "aggregate" means added up quaker bill Jan 2012 #25
Kicked and recommended. TheWraith Jan 2012 #19
I stand corrected. applegrove Jan 2012 #21
Fascinating result. joshcryer Jan 2012 #22
I wonder if fast food is counted and how much that accounts for... nt Bonobo Jan 2012 #23
what Krugman ignores if the knock-on effect of manufacturing... JCMach1 Jan 2012 #24
Krugman has not, and is not likely to ignore that cthulu2016 Jan 2012 #26
I am a Krugman fan actually... his point is about stimulus JCMach1 Jan 2012 #28
Sorry for misunderstanding you cthulu2016 Jan 2012 #30
He would probably say something like JCMach1 Jan 2012 #31
Theoretically the real analogy is more like this: joshcryer Jan 2012 #27
mon dieu JCMach1 Jan 2012 #29
Check it out: joshcryer Jan 2012 #32
We have bauxite reserves, but no mining JCMach1 Jan 2012 #33
+1, I think that's true, and it's not like a conspiracy or anything. joshcryer Jan 2012 #34
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Krugman: 85% of consumer ...»Reply #8